Skip to main content

About your Search

20121006
20121006
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)
've sea got jobbers. >> business pioneer jack welch calls these numbers into question. >> these numbers don't smell right. >> jack welch was a successful businessman. >> this is about asking questions. >> on this subject he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. congressman west, take it away. >> you can't deny the numbers. >> don't challenge my intelligence. >> there's not a shred of evidence they've ever manipulated this number. >> people have stopped looking for work. >> more and more people have just stopped looking for work. >> that is definitely not the case. >> completely wrong. >> people are not giving up. they're going back into the work force. >> i think i get the last word. >> i won't allow that to happen and that is why i'm running for a second term of president of the united states. >>> good evening, i'm ezra klein in for lawrence o'donnell. it's 32 days until the election, though we are only 5 days into october, we've already had two october surprises. first, there was president obama's weak debate performance. and then today the jobs report, the second-to-last mo
in the latest job report and showing a dip in the unemployment. former chairman jack welch is skeptical. meaning that employers added a modest 114,000 jobs and the drop comes at a critical time for the president who is coming off a weak debate performance with romney. joining us is new york times best selling author out with the latest book. ann coulter. at this point in time the president said we will be at 5.6 and enjoying that part of the economy and a more comfortable position and now they are running with this new number. what is your response. >> it is noticeable that a lot of economist are saying this is not possible. you would need more than 114,000 jobbings. i don't think it matters except to broadcasting tv shows or writing for newspaper what number they throw up on the screen. people know they are out of work and in jobs and they are way overqualified for and working part-time. so many people are going out of business and under working now. 23 million unemployed difference does it make? >> the numbers simply write away the 211,000,000 people stopping to look for people. >> oh, yes. pe
is the former g.e. ceo jack welch. unbelievable job numbers. they can't debate so they change the numbers. he appeared earlier today on "your world." >> these numbers don't smell right when you think about where the economy is right now. every economist predicted roughly 90,000 to 120,000. this economy doesn't feel like the employment improved this level. it is just -- maybe it's a coincidence that the month before the election, we have a number that comes out 1/10th below when the president took office. >> sean: jack welch is not the only one tawing of this timely development. listen to what business insider said on fox business new york this morning. >> i feel like i am watching a movie, a suspense movie. because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate. and somebody needs to dig real deep into this. how in the world, miraculously, we have the best flz 30 years, right before the election? somebody needs to do an investigation, like they are doing an investigation in libbia. they need to investigate the numbers because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate? >
a number that comes out 1/10th below when the president took office. >> sean: jack welch is not the only one tawing of this timely development. listen to what business insider said on fox business new york this morning. >> i feel like i am watching a movie, a suspense movie. because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate. and somebody needs to dig real deep into this. how in the world, miraculously, we have the best flz 30 years, right before the election? somebody needs to do an investigation, like they are doing an investigation in libbia. they need to investigate the numbers because there is no way in the world these numbers are accurate? >> the same administration not telling the truth about benghazi and libya and the death of four americans. there are very important questions that need to be asked of the obama administration. when you look at the hardidate athere is no way to explain how the rate decreased from 8.1% to 7.8%. as the former director of the nonpartisan cbo put it, it is simply implausible. a few things to keep in mind. the real unemployment rate remain
getting jobs. now here is the grand daddy of all job truthers. former general electric ceo jack welch had fun this morning. he tweeted this. he couldn't believe it. unbelievable job numbers. these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so they change the numbers. welch went on fox news and claimed he wasn't making accusations about the administration. he's just raising the question. >> it's just ironic that these assumptions all came this way the month before the election. you draw your own conclusions. >> welch received a different reception when he tried to peddle his theory to my colleague chris matthews on this network. >> i have no evidence to prove that. i just raised the question. >> no you didn't. you said these chicago guys will do anything. >> yeah. >> so they changed the numbers. do you want to take this back? >> no i don't want to take it back. >> there is a serious assertion there was corruption here, infiltration or getting to -- it's not funny, jack. you're talking about the president of the united states playing with the bureau of statistics numbers. this is nixon stu
growth in the month surprising to jack welch, former ceo of ge. here is what he said. >> well, and the last two months we have gone from 83-81. now we are going to 7.8% by changing the numbers assumptions. like. i don't know if -- what the right number is. i tell you, these numbers don't smell right when you think about where the economy is right now. gerri: gary, to you first. is the bls giving as ps? >> it is the bs. look. three months ago i said that even if we got newt we would be under 8% because the politics of it. we saw 30 days ago the fed announced a open ended printing of money to get asset prices up, and they say 50 days before election, this one is a joke. if you noticed anything about this number, the estimates of job gains came in the exact amount it was supposed to which should have kept it at 8.2%. the estimates, somehow we got to 7.8%, and the use the most of tiles survey, the household survey. gerri: we will get to that. >> 400,000. gerri: can these numbers be sai's? >> i don't think they can. we have had rumors of bls massaging numbers for the benefit of the
numbers so wrong. jack welch went further obviously the former ceo of g.e. and he said unbelievable jobs numbers. the these chicago guys will do anything. can't debate so they change the numbers. set person who suggested something fishy was going on. >> and of course our own lou dobbs has said no the bureau of labor statistics is insulated entity and peter morris is i on our show a short time ago said no, this isn't the case that they would never cook the books for a white house. that's not something they would do. they are economists and statisticians and there might be anomaly in the numbers. here was jack welch yesterday talking to cavuto and he said something smells funny here, listen. >> these numbers don't smell right when you think about where the economy is right now. every economist this morning predicted roughly 90 to 120,000 and 8.2 unemployment came out very favorably just one tenth of a point below when the president took office. >> well, it's funny when people manipulate numbers back and forth on both sides. i always think about the 23 million people who don't have a job an
and significant decrease in the unemployment rate. jack welch, he went to as far to suggest that the numbers may be manipulated by the obama administration. do you think that the numbers add up? >> i think the suggestion that the numbers was cooked is relatively ridiculous. that being said. economists at the labor department will admit freely that there is a lot of margin of error in these numbers. a month after each job report these numbers are revised upward or downward. the question of the number came out of the household survey, 800,000 plus number, there is a lot of margin for error, possibly as much as 400,000. that is admitted by folks within the labor department, as well. i think you can't get too hung up on the overall numbers because typically these are revised upward or downward. that tends to happen a month later when we stop paying attention. >> heather: what will the numbers do in terms of swaying voters' opinions, specifically undecided voter? do you expect to see a change in the polls as a result of this? >> it's a tough question. i generally think the jobs reports do not move as
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23 (some duplicates have been removed)